What Holds Some People back from admitting Homosexuality is OK?

[LoTrobador]

Lo Trobador in how some heterosexuals look at homosexuals and think we deserve different treatment. Like Bob has stated all over this thread that homosexuality shouldn't be promoted as acceptable.

And where do you see hypocrisy (the practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness) in it? I would understand, should the situation be e.g. that one does promote equal treatment, but at the same time discriminates against homosexual people. But if someone thought homosexual people deserve different treatment and voiced this opinion?

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I care less about personal hypocrisy than the fact that these people can vote their bigotry into law.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Lo Trobador expecting us to be silent about our sexuality in public, as stated all over this thread, is discremination. Maybe you can't see that.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Why should we be silent about our sexuality? Straight people aren't silent about theirs. Maybe the reason some fear homosexuals being open in public and being accepted is because then the closet doors will come flying open.

 

[LoTrobador]

Lo Trobador expecting us to be silent about our sexuality in public, as stated all over this thread, is discremination. Maybe you can't see that.

But what does it have to do with hypocrisy?

 

[ChristineES]

Seriously? Why do some people continue to profess this idea that homosexuality is somehow unnatural or wrong? I've even seen so-called gay advocates do it. They'll say that they defend our right to be gay, and believe we deserve protection, yet they still call our sexuality wrong. Why is that? Is it deep rooted personal issues?

Fear. They are afraid to against the teachings they were brought up with.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Lo Trobador you don't see how it's hypocritical to say gay people should be silent about our sexuality, but straight people should be allowed to be open about theirs?

 

[LoTrobador]

Lo Trobador you don't see how it's hypocritical to say gay people should be silent about our sexuality, but straight people should be allowed to be open about theirs?

If hypocrisy means

the practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess

or

the practice of professing standards, beliefs, etc., contrary to one's real character or actual behaviour, esp the pretence of virtue and piety,

then how would thinking that only homosexual people shoud be allowed to be open about their sexuality, voicing this opinion and acting accordingly be hypocritical?

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Lo Trobador thinking only heterosexual people should be allowed to be open about their sexuality fits both definitions you gave for hypocrite, but forget it.

 

[LoTrobador]

Lo Trobador thinking only heterosexual people should be allowed to be open about their sexuality fits both definitions you gave for hypocrite, but forget it.

1.

A thinks only heterosexual people should be allowed to be open about their sexuality.
A voices this opinion.
A acts accordingly.

2.

B thinks only heterosexual people should be allowed to be open about their sexuality.
B voices the opinion that both heterosexual and homosexual people should be allowed to be open about their sexuality.
B acts in accordance with the opinion that only heterosexual people should be allowed to be open about their sexuality.

3.

C thinks only heterosexual people should be allowed to be open about their sexuality.
C voices the opinion that both heterosexual and homosexual people should be allowed to be open about their sexuality.
C acts contrary to the opinion that only heterosexual people should be allowed to be open about their sexuality.

Do you see the differences and how they relate to the abovementioned definitions of hypocrisy?

 

[Smoke]

Lo Trobador you don't see how it's hypocritical to say gay people should be silent about our sexuality, but straight people should be allowed to be open about theirs?

Not really. Bigotry and hypocrisy aren't the same thing.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

For most I would say religion, society, or not having an understanding of it. When I was a Christian, I was extremely homophobic because "it's God's law." Then after I converted I was still homophobic partly because many people around me where homophobic, and I didn't know much about it.

If everyone learns to except Homosexuallity then we would die off as a race

That just isn't in the cards. Even if everyone 100% accepts homosexuality, not everyone will be homosexual. And bisexuals will still have chances of reproduction. Even if half of the population became homosexual overnight, the human race would still fair quite well.

Homosexuality as promiscuity promotes disease with no benefit. If a person is homosexual the only people benefiting are the partners. Yes you can adopt or contribute great works to society but you can do this without homosexual relations. To be honest I believe homosexuality to be latent in all the humans. Scientists have come close to stating this. If this is the case then Homosexuality if accepted could spead to the entire human race.

Heterosexuality that is promiscuity also promotes disease, unwanted pregnancy, often to no benefit. And scientist have not stated anything nearly conclusive about what causes people to be gay. The only thing official is that it is a combination of genetics and environment. The exact ratio is still up for debate.

It should also be noted that the offspring of homosexual couples does not show any particular inclination for (or against) becoming homosexual themselves, either.

That is indeed important to note. The APA has debunked that and many other myths about homosexuals. They also noted that the most important thing in a child's home life isn't the gender of the parents, one parent, two parents or five, all male, all female, or mixed, but the most important thing above all else is a stable home life.

I am against promicuity and sexual expresions in public. Which clashes a lot with homosexual male display's. I am not against homosexuallity(it is natural) just against promoting it as acceptable standards in society.

Really now, that isn't a very fair statement. Promiscuity and displays run on both sides. Just yesterday I was at a concert, and standing in line for my ticket in front of me was a heterosexual couple. The woman was wearing a tank top and bikini bottom, and the guy was way too eager to show it off. Next thing that happened was some other guy asked to take a picture of this girls butt. If anything, I would have to say that public displays are more common in heterosexual men, and are encouraged more frequently by men. After all, it wasn't Halestorm's singer (who is female) who asked the women in the crowd to show their breasts. It was one of the singers who was a guy. (Puddle of Mudd if anyone is curious.)

Holding hands, hugs, or a sweet kiss can be very cute and uplifting to see, but anything gropey turns me off.

I hold the same view. Seeing couples in love is such a wonderful thing. Even my fiance and I will hug, stare into each other's eyes, and kiss on the lips in public. We do this not only because we love each other, but because we are not ashamed to show we love each other. Now groping, squeezing, tonguing, and other such stuff should be saved for private.

Not because they are bad but to set a norm.

Norms are not always good though. It use to be the norm to heavily discriminate against black people.

That being said homosexuals only need laws to protect them so they can wear their sexuality for all to see. They in my mind, then really do not need laws to protect them as I am against displaying your sexuality for all to see no matter what it is.

I know one man who is straight, but you would swear he is gay. The way he talks sounds gay, he is very well groomed and dressed, has very polite mannerisms, and damned near everyone who meets him thinks he is gay until they get to know him alittle. I know another man who is gay and he not only acts and looks very masculine, he is known to bash effeminate gays.